Although the initially polite, professional, and disinterested approach to the interview process was appreciable, the later responses by the HR were extremely dissatisfactory.

The first formal round started with a series of online coding tests, comprised of some fundamental but good coding questions about .NET. These ranged from demonstrating a collection and enumeration to questions related to JQuery selectors, HTML5, MVC4/ASP.NET, and subjective theoretical questions about OOPs. It was conducted online and went well.

The interviewers were happy with the responses.

The second round was with a (Swiss) Solution Architect and was a video conference via Skype. This round involved average but fundamental questions. However, the major part of it was to describe and explain the architecture of the best project I had worked on. It was followed by a shared presentation of coding skills (basic snippets) using Google Shared Docs.

This round also went well.

Next, the HR for correspondence changed, and that is where things became skeptical. When I didn't receive a response for the next 6 days, I requested feedback. The 'new' HR responded that he received a 'positive' note from the Architect. The next round involved completing a mini-project using the best architecture, patterns, and libraries that demonstrated OOPs, MVC4, JS, Design Patterns, and other skills. It also required a sort of TRS to accompany the completed project.

I spent 2 days (more than 8 hours) working on this task, parallel to my already pressing full-time job, and completed it with alacrity.

(Aside: I have more than 5 years of experience in architecting and implementing robust and exhaustive MVC4 applications using Repository, Unity, EF, and other important design patterns that every well-experienced developer in the field would be aware of.)

By now, it had already been over 2 weeks since the interview process started.

Here is where I got disappointed. The HR, though I won't call him indifferent or dawdling, did not respond for the next 5 days. When I finally requested the status on the 6th day, I was informed that the project had been sent to the 'Swiss' architect for evaluation and that he was pressed for time due to work and would respond shortly. Strange! Six days for a short mini-project during an ongoing interview process, with a company of more than xxxxxxx... employees – how many more days? Still, I waited patiently.

Eventually, when I didn't hear a word from the 'new' HR for the 'next 2 weeks', I tried to seek an update on the status. Another HR (the initial one), whom I included in this conversation, promptly responded (as always) that the 'new' HR would get back to me shortly.

After 3 days, I received a verbiage (copy-pasted) stating that 'many applications were received, others match well with the profile... blah blah..'. We all know that standard rejection verbiage.

When I demanded feedback on where the project was found lacking and requested the feedback, dead air prevailed.

Honestly, I do not think that an organization of the stature of Expedia would act so irresponsibly (or carelessly? or unprofessionally?). I don't know; it is for you (or may be some seniors at Expedia India, perhaps 'Expedia Global') to decide. After all, I had put in a lot of 'hard-work' due to my genuine interest in working with a good brand (that I personally liked). Commensurate feedback was the least that was expected.

I vehemently question the HR: if he knew that the 'mini-project' was wanting, he could have shared this much much earlier (at least not after 3 weeks!!) so I could have materialized other substantial plans. May be I was too patient.

It seems that the issue here was not really with Expedia per se but one person. I believe it is my responsibility to speak out about the issue and put it in writing so those who care know!

Moral: When interviewing with Expedia India, pester the HR for updates; don't be too patient. Ideally, never wait for more than 2 days for a response (unless explicitly asked).